Yeah its been known for awhile the 9300's were going to be nothing more than 9450/9550/etc rejects w/ half their cache laser cut. To bad, they would have KILLED AMD in the low end if they had the beefy big cache of their bigger brothers.

__________________
"If you ever start taking things too seriously, just remember that we are talking monkeys on an organic spaceship flying through the universe." -JR

“if your opponent has a conscience, then follow Gandhi. But if you enemy has no conscience, like Hitler, then follow Bonhoeffer.” - Dr. MLK jr

It amazes me the attitudes people have (and I am not pointing any of you guys out so please don't misunderstand me) on the internet about the 45nm CPU's. They were never meant to be alot better than the 65nm chips as Jmac said but is seems people were expecting them to be. The lower multi's are alittle bit of a handicap on some current boards, but the 790i/X48 boards are already showing amazing FSB speeds which will let these CPU's really stretch their legs. 45nm does clock better with lower voltage since my QX6850 needs 1.4V to run 3.65GHz while my QX9650 does 3.8GHz with 1.25V. The heatload is also alot lower for the 45nm CPU's. I guess we have all become very spoiled with constant upgrades and now that the upgrade curve has flattened, expectations have far exceeded even what we were told to expect.